Participants in this open-topic Fireside Forum have occasionally been challenged to avoid a "race to the bottom" in the emotional content of forum postings. Most online forums outside of purely political sites do not allow political discussions because of the inherent challenges. We're willing to work with those challenges, but we're not willing to let these discussions succumb to negative approaches. (Maybe it's a West Coast thing .)

Following are some statements of etiquette standards from other forums that seem to pertain.

"Generalized Forum Etiquette:1. Have a Sense of Community

Even if you despise authority and curse down the highest ranking official in your national government, let it be known that senseless acts of lack of respect will not be tolerated. Forum members will and forever shall communicate with one another in a formal manner and with the primary concern being respect. Users will be banned or deleted upon extreme violation, and any outright attack on a [forum] administrator is strictly prohibited."

"- Poor manners are not respected on the message board. Don’t be lewd, abrasive, argumentative or rude. Always be civil, don’t use profanity. Many people are offended by swearing. ...

"- When discussing something that might be considered “controversial,” forum etiquette must remain intact, which means no out & out arguing, insulting/flaming. We all can lose our cool on occasion, but an overall pattern of anti-social behavior will be grounds for temporary suspension or permanent eviction from the forum.

"- The aggressive promotion by a forum member of a particular spiritual, philosophical, political or personal position that lacks respect for the views or beliefs of others, or seeks to invalidate or put down the views of others, or who’s expression of said viewpoint is constant & unsolicited as to become harassing, is prohibited."

...

"- Flaming is prohibited. A flame (for the purposes of this forum) may be:

a. A gratuitous insult or an unprovoked rude or off-color remark.

b. A personal attack unrelated to a member’s posted words.

c. Remarks which characterize a person negatively or in direct contrast to their posted words or online actions, in order to belittle, frighten, hurt, silence or embarrass them.

d. A remark intended to misrepresent a person in the interest of incurring anger, ridicule or harassment against that person.

f. A remark solely intended to shame, anger or misrepresent a person or group.

g. A remark that speculates on a person’s character independently of what that person has posted in that thread &/or in that forum.

h. A remark which falsely attributes actions, words, intentions & beliefs to a person solely for the purpose of embarrassing, hurting, frightening, silencing or belittling them.

"It is fine to disagree with what someone has written, but personal attacks are out. There is a big difference between writing:

“I disagree with what you are saying because…”
&
“You’ve got to be kidding, that’s the dumbest thing I ever heard…”

...

"What is not a flame: referring accurately & diplomatically to a person’s negative or questionable actions, statements or beliefs as quoted from a message(s)."

"- The forum admin reserves the right to remove a member from the board at any time. The forum admin is the sole owner & final authority of this discussion forum. All decisions regarding forum management are the sole responsibility of the forum admin. Those who do not agree with the policies or management of the forum are free to leave. If you’ve failed to follow the posting guidelines, you may receive a message letting you know what happened & how to prevent it in the future. This is not a personal attack branding you as an unworthy list participant. Please take it in the spirit intended & do not attack the forum administrator and/or board moderator who has sent the reminder."

"Why can't I start my posts with the word "um," be a snotty jerk, or present my views as God's TV gospel?

"Don't start your posts with "um" or "uh" or words like that because nine times out of ten, those words precede a snotty correction directed at another poster. It's rude and dismissive and it drives the staff nuts, so please, don't do it. The same goes for "sorry, but..." and "excuse me, but..." and, really, any other snitty post-starter.

"If you can't talk to other people as if they're intelligent, you can't post. Don't talk down to your fellow posters, don't lecture them, and don't state your opinion as fact. And please don't think we're going to argue technicalities of whether you said "uh" or "um" at the beginning of the post; we can tell when you're being snide and snotty about other people's opinions.

"If you're having a problem keeping your temper under control, get it under control, or post somewhere else. It's supposed to be fun. It's not combat. It's not necessary for it to become personal.

"If you want to point out an error, that's fine, but please find a way to do it that isn't the written equivalent of an eye-roll."

Of course it is difficult to blatantly slur a person you never met or had read through their life's resume .......so where do we post the resume's before dialogue begins with one another?.......no really, these are great KM.....wonder why it wasn't until now you posted them?

Are there any others hidden in the closet you may want to lay out now before we move forward?.....you could also add that the administrator promises to abide by these rules for all parties, left, right or indifferent

Here's another minor variation on the above. It is insulting and bad forum etiquette to refer to other forum participants by initials instead of their screen names (unless they have chosen initials for their screen names) or as if they are some third person you're talking past.

As in this rude use of initials, instead of a proper name:

Yes, RH, and ...

which also shows the same usage as the "um, ..." described above, or as in this rude type of talking past someone:

Look for the media (and it looks like SDR ) ...

And it is not enough to just soften or cloak insulting approaches. It doesn't fool anyone, and it doesn't help either.

Same thing for sarcastic use of emoticons. It ain't rocket science. Be nice.

If you're really trying, and you're not sure if you're being insulting or sarcastic, why not just back off the emotion a little more?

Forum etiquette examples have not had to be posted previously, because the majority of forum users seem to understand them without the explanation. And I have other things to do than play kindergarten teacher. But some of them are pretty good, and I hope they will be helpful in allowing a wider range of socializations to co-exist and interact in friendly and constructive ways, both in these Design Community forums, and across the net.

There have been a few, rare, vulgar threads posted on this site, and now we have another.

1. I vote that these sophmoric, insulting, deviant opinions have no place on an architectural discussion group, and should be deleted, and I can almost guarantee you have the same opinion.

2. I encourage many persons, institutions, museums, to visit this wonderful site, and to have vulgarity postings extremely diminishes the good name of this site and insults everyday readers, students, and the advertisers who certainly expect much higher reading audience. They can leave this site to never return, rather than support (or appear to support) sexual content forums which are entirely out of place.

3. I consider this site to be exceptional as a learning tool for all age groups, never for - potential abuse - or vulgar audiences. How can I recommend this site to my nieces and nephews, grandchildren, even elementary school and high school students, when "smut" appears and is tolerated?

Thank you Architecture Week for this wonderful site, and let's keep it that way.